US President Donald Trump said on January 15, 2026 that Ukraine, rather than Russia, was holding up the conclusion of a peace agreement, expressing frustration with the lack of progress in negotiations aimed at ending the war. Speaking amid ongoing US-mediated talks involving Ukrainian and Russian negotiators, Trump argued that Moscow was ready to move towards peace, while Kyiv was delaying a deal, a claim that has drawn scrutiny following his remarks on Ukraine peace negotiations and responsibility for delays.
The comments were made against the backdrop of stalled discussions over key issues, including the future of the Donbas region and long-term security guarantees for Ukraine. The negotiating climate has also been shaped by a renewed wave of Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure, adding urgency and complexity to efforts to reach any form of agreement.
Kyiv rejects blame amid continued Russian military pressure
Ukrainian officials and many Western analysts argue that portraying President Volodymyr Zelenskiy as obstructing peace ignores the fundamental reality of the conflict, namely Russia’s role as the aggressor that launched and continues a full-scale invasion. Kyiv has repeatedly stated that it cannot accept a settlement that would formalise the loss of its territory or undermine its sovereignty, constraints reinforced by Ukraine’s constitution, which prohibits any president from ceding land.
Diplomats note that Russia has shown little concrete willingness to compromise, frequently dismissing proposals for even temporary ceasefires as unacceptable. By maintaining offensive operations and advancing demands viewed in Kyiv as non-negotiable, Moscow is widely seen as benefiting from prolonging the conflict to strengthen its position on the ground.
War dynamics favour Moscow as talks drag on
The prolonged nature of the war is regarded by many observers as serving Russia’s strategic interests, allowing it to consolidate territorial gains and later press Ukraine to accept what it terms “new realities”. Alongside diplomatic manoeuvring, the Kremlin has continued to rely on military force, including missile and drone strikes targeting civilian and energy infrastructure.
These attacks, intensified during winter conditions, have exacerbated humanitarian pressures and are viewed as part of a broader strategy to apply psychological pressure on Ukrainian society. The persistence of such strikes during negotiations has reinforced doubts about Russia’s commitment to genuine de-escalation.
Risks for Western unity and support for Ukraine
Trump’s statements have raised concerns among European officials and policy experts that such rhetoric could weaken international backing for Ukraine. By shifting responsibility away from Moscow, critics warn, the remarks may embolden political forces within the European Union that oppose continued military, financial and sanctions support for Kyiv, potentially undermining allied cohesion.
European leaders have repeatedly stressed that a sustainable peace depends on a clear change in Russia’s behaviour, not on concessions that would reward aggression. With no substantive moves from Moscow towards de-escalation, many in Europe argue that deterrence and continued support for Ukraine remain essential to prevent setting a precedent in which force reshapes borders with impunity.
